| 摘要: |
| 限制高消费制度过度强调克服“执行难”的工具功能而忽视了自身的系统性构建，在经历碎片化、内部体系化与外部体系化阶段后，其制度内容愈发成熟，但问题依旧存在。限制高消费制度与相邻的强制执行制度关系模糊，人民法院与执行当事人之间的关系仍未理顺，迫切需要进行制度优化。通过辨析可知，执行威慑机制与民事责任财产的保全对限制高消费制度的构建有重要影响，但不宜作为限制高消费制度的法理基础。在《强制执行法》制定的背景下，应回归制度的出发点，以间接执行法理作为构建限制高消费制度的理论基础，优化限制高消费制度的适用范围、适用条件、适用方式和救济程序，并努力协调其与终结本次执行程序、失信被执行人名单之间的关系。 |
| 关键词: 限制高消费制度 间接执行 终结本次执行 失信名单 执行异议 |
| DOI： |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:山东省社会科学项目“民事强制执行监督制度研究”（项目编号： 2019CSPJ05） |
|
| The Revolution and Jurisprudential Analysis of the Restricting High Consumption |
|
Song Chunlong
|
|
|
| Abstract: |
| The high consumption restriction system overemphasizes the function of tools that overcome “enforcement difficulty” and ignores its own systematic construction. After undergoing the stages of fragmentation， internalization and externalization， the content of the system has become more mature， but the problem still exists. The relationship between restricting high consumption and the adjacent enforcement system is ambiguous， and the relationship between the people's courts and enforcement parties has not yet been straightened out， so there is an urgent need to optimize the system. According to the analysis， the enforcement deterrent mechanism and the preservation of civil liability property have an important impact on the construction of the high consumption restriction， but they should not be used as the legal basis for high consumption restriction. In the context of the formulation of the Enforcement Law， we should return to the starting point of the system and use indirect enforcement of law as the theoretical basis for constructing the high consumption restriction， optimize its scope， conditions， methods and relief procedures， and try to coordinate its interaction with the ending this executive procedure system and the dishonesty list. |
| Key words: High Consumption Restriction System, Indirect Enforcement of Law, Ending this Executive Procedure, Dishonest List, Execution Dissidence |
